On 6/26/23 12:40, Boris Brezillon wrote:
> I think here is the major problem I have with this patch: you've made
> drm_gem_shmem_{get_pages,pin}() private, which forces me to call
> drm_gem_shmem_pin() in a path where I already acquired the resv lock
> (using the drm_exec infra proposed by Christian). That would
> probably work if you were letting ret == -EALREADY go through, but I'm
> wondering if it wouldn't be preferable to expose
> drm_gem_shmem_pin_locked().
You should be free to expose the necessary functions. They are private
because nobody need them so far and we don't want to export unused
functions.
--
Best regards,
Dmitry
